Re: [Bacula-users] About tapes capacity

2011-04-20 Thread J. Echter
Am 20.04.2011 16:31, schrieb Jason Voorhees: > On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 9:22 AM, Paul Mather wrote: >> On Apr 20, 2011, at 10:17 AM, Jason Voorhees wrote: >> >>> Hi people: >>> >>> I'm running Bacula 5.0.3 with an tape library IBM TS3100 using LTO5 >>> tapes of 1.5 TB capacity each one. I have a si

Re: [Bacula-users] About tapes capacity

2011-04-20 Thread John Drescher
On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 10:31 AM, Jason Voorhees wrote: > On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 9:22 AM, Paul Mather wrote: >> On Apr 20, 2011, at 10:17 AM, Jason Voorhees wrote: >> >>> Hi people: >>> >>> I'm running Bacula 5.0.3 with an tape library IBM TS3100 using LTO5 >>> tapes of 1.5 TB capacity each one.

Re: [Bacula-users] About tapes capacity

2011-04-20 Thread Phil Stracchino
On 04/20/11 10:17, Jason Voorhees wrote: > When the job started Bacula took the tape L5BA0005 and never required > another one. As you can see Bacula apparently wrote 2,058,019,117,056 > bytes (approx. 2 TB) but my tape is just 1.5 TB capacity. Does anybody > know why? My job isn't using compressio

Re: [Bacula-users] About tapes capacity

2011-04-20 Thread Jason Voorhees
On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 9:22 AM, Paul Mather wrote: > On Apr 20, 2011, at 10:17 AM, Jason Voorhees wrote: > >> Hi people: >> >> I'm running Bacula 5.0.3 with an tape library IBM TS3100 using LTO5 >> tapes of 1.5 TB capacity each one. I have a simple question: If I run >> a job backup of a server t